Paper detail

No double detonations but core carbon ignitions in high-resolution, grid-based simulations of binary white dwarf mergers

We study the violent phase of the merger of massive binary white dwarf systems. Our aim is to characterize the conditions for explosive burning to occur, and identify a possible explosion mechanism of Type Ia supernovae. The primary components of our model systems are carbon-oxygen (C/O) white dwarfs, while the secondaries are made either of C/O or of pure helium. We account for tidal effects in the initial conditions in a self-consistent way, and consider initially well-separated systems with slow inspiral rates. We study the merger evolution using an adaptive mesh refinement, reactive, Eulerian code in three dimensions, assuming symmetry across the orbital plane. We use a co-rotating reference frame to minimize the effects of numerical diffusion, and solve for self-gravity using a multi-grid approach. We find a novel detonation mechanism in C/O mergers with massive primaries. Here the detonation occurs in the primary's core and relies on the combined action of tidal heating, accretion heating, and self-heating due to nuclear burning. The exploding structure is compositionally stratified, with a reverse shock formed at the surface of the dense ejecta. The existence of such a shock has not been reported elsewhere. The explosion energy ($1.6\times 10^{51}$ erg) and $^{56}$Ni mass (0.86 M$_\odot$) are consistent with a SN Ia at the bright end of the luminosity distribution, with an approximated decline rate of $Δm_{15}(B)\approx 0.99$. Our study does not support double-detonation scenarios in the case of a system with a 0.6 M$_\odot$ helium secondary and a 0.9 M$_\odot$ primary. Although the accreted helium detonates, it fails to ignite carbon at the base of the boundary layer or in the primary's core.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.